Hi,

Tao Ren [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/aspeed-vhub/core.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/aspeed-vhub/core.c
index cdf96911e4b1..be7bb64e3594 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/aspeed-vhub/core.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/aspeed-vhub/core.c

@@ -135,13 +135,9 @@ static irqreturn_t ast_vhub_irq(int irq, void *data)
 
 	/* Handle device interrupts */
 	if (istat & vhub->port_irq_mask) {
-		unsigned long bitmap = istat;
-		int offset = VHUB_IRQ_DEV1_BIT;
-		int size = VHUB_IRQ_DEV1_BIT + vhub->max_ports;
-
-		for_each_set_bit_from(offset, &bitmap, size) {
-			i = offset - VHUB_IRQ_DEV1_BIT;
-			ast_vhub_dev_irq(&vhub->ports[i].dev);
+		for (i = 0; i < vhub->max_ports; i++) {
+			if (istat & VHUB_DEV_IRQ(i))
+				ast_vhub_dev_irq(&vhub->ports[i].dev);

how have you measured your statement above? for_each_set_bit() does
exactly what you did. Unless your architecture has an instruction which
helps finds the next set bit (like cls on ARM), which, then, makes it
much faster.

I did some testing and result shows for() loop runs faster than
for_each_set_bit() loop. Please refer to details below (discussion with
Benjamin in the original patch) and kindly let me know your
suggestions.

no strong feelings, just surprised you're already worried about 20~40
cycles of cpu time ;-)

patch queued for next merge window

-- 
balbi